Gladman v. Stoddart
Gladman v. Stoddart
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court:
The assignment of errors, so far as based upon matters at issue in the pleadings, could not be considered in the absence of a statement of the evidence. Another is that the court erred in discharging defendant from his agency without notice to or acquiescence by the remaindermen. Others set up the same grounds upon which the motion to vacate was founded.
It appears, therefore, that the only grounds upon which the appeal could be heard are purely technical, relating to the time required of notice of calendaring and hearing the cause, and approving the last report of the receiver without sufficient notice and an audit of the same.
Without pausing to determine whether the grounds of appeal are so frivolous as to warrant summary affirmance, we are of opinion that they do not justify an extension of the time for filing the brief, upon the grounds stated in the application. The thirty days allowed for filing brief were ample. The application for extension is denied, and for the failure to file brief, the appeal must be dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- GLADMAN v. STODDART
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Appeal an» Error; Assignments of Error; Briefs; Extension of Time for Filing. 1. Assignments of error, so far as based upon matters at issue in the pleadings, will not be considered by this court in the absence of a statement of the evidence. 2. An appellant’s application for an extension of time for filing his brief, upon the ground that pressure of business lias prevented him from preparing it within the thirty days allowed, will be denied where no statement of the evidence was filed, and the only grounds upon which the appeal can be heard are purely technical, relating to notice of calendaring and hearing the cause, and to the approval without notice or audit of the report of a receiver appointed therein.